http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45326 http://www.collider.com/2010/06/02/thor-chris-hemsworth-new-images-concept-art/
Well, the Thor one isn't "art", it's a picture (only slightly doctored, mainly the hammer), and it's legit. That's exactly what we'll be seeing in the movie. The only complaint I have about Cap (sources say that the art shown is pretty much what we'll see in the film) is that without "wings" on the "mask", it looks much too "bullet headed". Otherwise it looks great.
Cap will have the full on winged hat version that he wears for a USO show, but he thinks it's impractical, and fruity, so the army makes him the combat version.
Of the two, though, Thor is the closest to being "authentic" with regards to the current comic book version.
I've never been a big fan of the Thor character. His mystical origins don't really mesh well with the more technological/scientific origins of other Marvel heroes like Spider-Man, Captain America, Hulk, Iron-Man, etc...
Well, I heard they were going to bullshit up a pseudo-science deal for Thor, like Gods are really aliens from hyperspace, or something.
Well, Marvel does play it like the gods are all super advanced aliens from another dimension anyway. So what's the difference?
To be fair, you made it sound as if they were planning to somehow deviate from the established in-universe mythology. I'm merely pointing out that this does not seem to be the case. Just out of curiosity, are you personally unfamiliar with the usual Thor comic line?
I haven't kept up in recent years, or even decades, but I'm quite familiar with how Marvel handles the supernatural. But, the movie universe, and how they'll handle it is a different animal.
Well if they handle it the way you heard, then clearly there's not much difference from how the comics handle it.
Eh. I guess for a live-action movie a more "Ultimates"-style Cap uniform is in order, but I personally like the classic uniform.
Actually, I hope that they DO keep it vague. I think it works better if it's not explained in too great a detail.
Thor looks too Hollywood, not genuine Norse enough. Cap looks okay, 'cept for the already stated "bullet head" look. And doesn't Cappy carry a gun?
Steve Rogers doesn't, as a rule - he got so good with the shield he figured he didn't need a sidearm. Bucky Barnes packs heat, though his marksmanship is good enough to reliably go for non-lethal shots.
Thor's costume looks too techno to me for a mystical god-being. It screams "I was designed for a moviee!" And he needs a square jaw. And it's the wrong fo... no, wait...
Ok here is why I dont like Cap's uniform. From the looks of it it has a lot of molded plastic in it. For a modern day uniform that would be ok. But you are talking about a uniform that was designed in 1940. Plastic? Hello? Yeah at least get your materials science down first dumb asses. Yeah yeah yeah I know, adamtinum and virbranium shield kinda skews that but it shouldnt. The shield is a one in a million item. Why try to fit a motorcycle riding patterned uniform into 1940? For Thor..where is the helmet? No helmet, no Thor. Again, please ditch the crotch rocket inspired look. You have a Norse freaking god. His outfit is older than the hills or at least is supposed to be. How about adding some flair to the boots. He is a god. He could really give a shit about looking uber cool. Over all though I can live with both, the Cap more than the Thor though
Well, not only the vibranium shield, but the super soldier serum. Hey, you'd be amazed the anomalous shit you can make with unlimited gub'mint money to throw at the problem. In real life, they had an experimental rubber that had bubbles the size of cells whipped into it, and it could keep an egg from cracking from a third storey window. Too expensive to mass produce, but there you go, a space-age material in the 1940's. If they could make that, I can buy that they could make a one-off Cap costume.
How do you know? If the Norse Gods are really advanced aliens, maybe the outfit looked like that, and primitive vikings interpreted it as best as they could with the materials they had, and then Stan Lee in the '60's interpreted it as best as he could.
1. They resemble the Ultimates version because it is clear from the Iron Man films that is the universe Marvel is bringing forth in the films. 2. Captain America's costume is likely the version he is equipped with once brought back to active duty in the present time.
I'm sure I read the approach they were going to take with the 'magic' of Thor, Loki and the rest was that of very advanced technology. What we've seen of The Destroyer armour certainly gives off that vibe.
I know what's bothering me about the Cap costume: The premise that you have to somehow change it from the classic costume for film. I mean Christopher Reeve wore pretty much the classic Superman costume. Tons better than the faggoted-up "Superman Returns" outfit, worn by whatsisname. And Spiderman? Common sense says you don't put your title character in a costume that completely covers his face--even his eyes!--but that is exactly what Sam Raimi did. And look how successful that was. And while I understood the necessity of the rubber suit for Michael Keaton, back in the early days of CGI, there really was no excuse not to put whatsisname-Christian Bale into something closer to the comic book costume. So fuck it. I don't care if they are impractical. I want the red buccaneer boots, the mail overshirt, and the wings on the head. Make it happen.
Exactly. If you're embarassed by the source material, don't make the movie, do something else & let someone who's into the concept do it.
